$499 PlayStation 3 Confirmed

Gamespot is reporting that the rumoured price drop from earlier this week is a reality. Starting on July 10th, the current 60GB model will sell for $499. Coming to US shores in August is the 80GB version only available in South Korea at the moment, which will retail for $599. They're bundling that unit with Motorstorm, so it's not just another 20 gigs for $100. "The price drop further indicates that, after a slow start, Sony is now aggressively trying to expand its customer base in the US. The move comes none too soon. According to the latest figures from industry-research firm the NPD Group, the PS3 only sold 82,000 units in the US in May, compared to the Xbox 360's 155,000 units and the Wii's 338,000 units." So, is this it? Will this price drop make you buy a PS3, or are you still holding off for the big games this fall?

Blu-Ray

[Brad1138]

I want one for the Blu-Ray player. I have a 61" DLP set that is just screaming for Blu-Ray or HD DVD, Personally I like Blu-Ray. Currently stand alone Blu-Ray players are $650+ (from a quick Google search). From the reviews I have read [pcworld.com] it holds up fairly well against them. Plus an awesome gaming machine.

Waiting for Metal Gear

[rolfwind]

It's the only game I need that's only for PS3. I might even wait until they port it though. $500 for one game is too expensive.

Also going to wait to see what Wii games are out this Christmas. With the immense popularity, I expect Wii will get a surge of games - but knowing that games take time to make, I wonder when it will happen. Perhaps Fall of '08.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

what are you waiting for?

[voltheir]

the ps3 has been "worth it" to any videophile since its release simply because of its bluray capability. It now has DVD upscaling.

for the more pure gamers out there - the ps online system isn't bad - the downloadable content can be quite good

I only like groundbreaking online games

[CrazyJim1]

My opinion isn't indicative of your average gamer. I bought an Xbox just to see the Halo 2 phenomena. I learned that voice chat lets you know you're playing with 12 year olds who get mad whether they win or lose. I learned that Halo 2 had no depth besides a couple insta-kill moves. I had my fun with it though. I won't buy a next gen system until I find a game that breaks ground with online play because that's all I like.

Re:Waiting for Metal Gear

[Fallen Kell]

I was going to wait as well for Metal Gear. However, I might pick one up. I have a 46" 1080p Sharp that would love to have BluRay to watch on.

As for the Wii and new games, I would love to see more games on the Wii, being that I have had one since release day (was up in line at 5:45am). My only concern is that the games will be horrible ports from other systems. The uniqueness of the Wii controllers is not something that makes it easy to slap on any old game that was designed for something else. You need to have really thought out what you can do with the controls and have that in mind when making the interface. I dread the thought of simply swinging the wii numchuk around in circles to make my character get up after falling down or some other non-intuitive, tedious motion to make something happen. For many actions in a game and button is just a better idea. However, there will be places and times to use the movements and sensitivity of the Wii controllers have to offer. Things that are intuitive, like using it to control a swords movements or turn a door nob, or grasp an item (yes, you can do this very will with the combination of the buttons on top and bottom of the remote, plus force feedback, this is very possible). But don't have me randomly shaking the remotes just to do something like push back someone who has grappled me in "Call of Duty", or shake the numchuk to change weapons, etc., etc... Use your brain here and use motions where they make sense, not just to add motions to your interface. You shouldn't have to read the instruction manual to figure out that you have to shake the numchuk up and down to make the character use a grenade, it should just be intuitive...

Re:"aggressively"?

[BeBoxer]

Hmmm. Let's see. He said "basic XBox 360". You quoted the price for the top of the line 360 with the most expensive add-on available. But you're clearly just trolling. You know that $499 less $200 is $299. And you know that $299 is the price of the 360 core. But you wandered off like PS3 fanboys always do. What you (and Sony) forget is that some people buy a game console just to play games. And if you just play games the PS3 is horribly overpriced. Even at $499, it will still be way more expensive than the competition (by 66% to 100%).

Re:"aggressively"?

[Rosyna]

And you know that $299 is the price of the 360 core. But you wandered off like PS3 fanboys always do. What you (and Sony) forget is that some people buy a game console just to play games.

And you did what MS fanboys always do. You assumed someone can play games on the $299 Core. The Core system doesn't have a hard drive or memory card, which is necessary [xbox.com] for online play or to play original Xbox games. So you have to pay extra for either of these if you want to play online games. A hard drive is required to play Xbox games.

So yes, you can play games on the Xbox 360 Core system for $299, assuming you don't want to play online and don't want to play original Xbox games.

Crappy poll

[suv4x4]

"So, is this it? Will this price drop make you buy a PS3, or are you still holding off for the big games this fall?"

That's it? Where's the third option, "neither of the above". I want my third option, god damn it!!

Let's see, what does $499 PS3 change. XBOX360 is $399, Wii is $250.
For your extra money, you get poor list of games, $65 a pop, and Blu-Pending-Disaster support, at around $45 a pop.

I'm about as excited about all of this, as I would be if Epson released $50 cheaper printers. It's about the ink, people!

Re:Crappy poll

[bigstrat2003]

For your extra money, you get poor list of games, $65 a pop, and Blu-Pending-Disaster support, at around $45 a pop.

Whoa, dude. Slow down there. Blu-Ray movies are not $45 each, they're more like $25 each. That's not even close to what you said.

Anyways, depending on what games are out (or you anticipate coming out) for a console, that can be more important than the price. There's nothing out for the 360 that could inspire me to buy one. Not for $50. The only game coming out that I want to play is Halo 3... well, that's not enough to inspire me to spend $400, either. I'll just go out and rent a 360 this fall, or borrow one from one of my friends.

The PS3's library is similarly anemic at the moment (well... ok, Ninja Gaiden Sigma is sex, but that's an Xbox port so I'm not sure how much it counts), but at least it has FF13 coming out, almost certainly more games after that, God of War 3 (rumored), AND it plays my PS2 games. That works great for me, and I'm happy with my PS3. Money is a consideration, to be sure, but games are at least an equally big consideration. Ideally, you want both, and now the PS3 is within $100 of its games-deprived competitor. Hell, if Sony hadn't dropped the ball and abandoned the 20-gig PS3, PS3s would be the same price as 360s. If I were at Microsoft, I'd be quite thankful.

Re:Announcing a Price Drop Actually Dropping It

[Eivind]

I wondered about that. "announcing" a price-drop tend to make no sense whatsoever. It'll only ensure that sales (at current price) drop to near-zero since everyone who wants one, but are *not* desperate for one (if they where desperate for one, they'd have it already) will hold off buying atleast until the price actually does drop. I guess when the price-drop is only a short time off this effect doesn't much matter.

Sony should be terrified of you

[Namarrgon]

You're about their least-favourite kind of customer - you like their heavily-subsidised hardware, but for running Linux on, not for the games. You'll cost them $200-300 with no hope of making back even close to that on game licence fees.

leat

I never really understood why Sony went to the trouble of making Linux available for the PS3 (at least, not why they did it for free). I can only think it was Krazy Ken's engineer training overriding his good sense. Yes, they got some good PR from it, but only in a small segment of the market, and that segment almost by definition isn't interested in buying games for their new toy.

They also ran the very real risk of universities etc buying up thousands of PS3s to build cheap HPC clusters, which would have been a financial disaster far outweighing any kudos they gained.

Re:"aggressively"?

[nick_davison]

Hmmm. Let's see. He said "basic XBox 360". You quoted the price for the top of the line 360 with the most expensive add-on available. But you're clearly just trolling.

The guy you're calling a troll made a point of referencing HDMI versions.

That was always the main sticking point on the $100 price difference between the two skus of the PS3. Wireless this and that, a bigger harddrive, these were all things you could upgrade if you wanted to. The one thing you couldn't upgrade was HDMI which, even now, no one knows how big an issue HDCP is going to turn in to in three or four years.

In short, if HDMI wasn't an issue, the $599 PS3 pricepoint would never have been an issue and the PS3 should always have been having its $100 cheaper version compared against Microsoft's cheaper versions (plus the cost of a memory card to unlock the functionality). That HDMI was considered such a critical factor, with many refusing to buy the cheaper option, makes considering HDMI variant of the X360 absolutely valid.

What you (and Sony) forget is that some people buy a game console just to play games. And if you just play games the PS3 is horribly overpriced. Even at $499, it will still be way more expensive than the competition (by 66% to 100%).

That argument can be taken as far and ridiculously as you want:

Were I to be facetious, the $299 X360 is still way more expensive (more than double the cost) of the PS2 which has a far better library of games. The counter argument there is to list the improved gaming features, higher resolution, etc. of the 360 over the PS2 - but then that same argument also holds that if better quality graphics are your criteria for games, the XBox 360 can't match the PS3's slightly higher end hardware and sure as hell can't match a PC with four 8800 chips, a gig of ram on each of the two cards, on a quad core processor.

In other words, purely looking at gaming...

• Gameboy - very cheap, much lower quality.
• PS2/XBox - cheap, lower quality
• X360 basic - medium price, decent quality, very hamstrung feature set
• X360 basic plus memory card - medium price, decent quality
• X360 plus HDD - higher end of medium price, improved decent quality games
• X360 elite - higher end of medium price again, no improvement for pure gamers
• PS3 - highest end of medium price, best of the medium price gaming options.
• Typical gamer PC - about 2-3 times the cost of the mid range but capable of higher resolutions, better AA, more processing power available to AI, etc.
• High end gamer PC - about ten times the cost of the mid range but capable of powering 2560x1600 30 inch displays with anti aliasing, DX10 effects and a mouse so you can actually play FPSs without needing the game to cheat your aiming. ;)

It's a continuum. Everyone picks the right price point for them (except for fanboys who declare the price point of their favored unit to be the only valid one, dismissing cheaper options as poorer quality while ignoring the cost savings and dismissing the more expensive options as overpriced while dismissing the quality improvements as trivial).

The PS3 is more expensive than an X360. Compare the minimum usable X360 (with 20GB hdd) against the PS3 and the small increase in gaming improvements doesn't justify the price increase if that's your sole criteria.

Then again, for many people, the more than double price increase from PS2 to X360 isn't justified either.

For other people, spending over $200 on a console, they damn well expect next gen DVD playback and a $200 add on player for the X360 that already doesn't work with every HD-DVD out there and doesn't have HDMI which may turn out to be critical down the line and for them the criteria isn't matched.

That's the fun thing about a diverse market, everyone gets to pick their own criteria and then find what fits that criteria the best.

Before I'm accused of being a Sony fan

Another reason for the 80Gb bump

[DrXym]

As posted on the PS3 blog [playstation.com] - "In short, we're introducing a new PS3 model with a 80GB hard drive which will include a free copy of MotorStorm, all for the retail price of $599. This 80GB package will be available starting in August, just a few short weeks from today. The larger hard drive will give players more of an opportunity to take advantage of all the downloadable games and trailers on the PLAYSTATION Network, including the content from our forthcoming download service which will include videos, movies and other entertainment content."

In other words expect a full video / music download service and possibly IPTV to be announced at E3. It's been a long time coming seeing as it was such an obvious and natural feature for the PS3 to have.

Re:Blu-Ray

[White Flame]

I've seen a few places like the Fry's Electronics store near me that had 2 identical Sony 1080p displays next to each other, playing the same HD movie, one in HD-DVD and the other in Blu-Ray, both stand-alone players. The HD-DVD version always had MUCH less compression noise and blockiness than the BR one. Then again I'm a real pixelophile and am far more offended about such things than the average person (I think that the visual quality of both suck dung and aren't worth the money; don't get me started on digital cable vs analog ;) ). I haven't seen BR movies on the PS3, but I suspect it'll have the same or worse quality than a standalone player.

Basic rule of capitalism

[realinvalidname]

"Stuff is worth what people will pay for it."

Clearly, the PS3 isn't worth $600 to very many people. I'll be surprised if it's worth $500 either. Despite all the technology they've crammed in there, the games library has almost zero appeal. Boring, joyless games plus Blu-Ray does not equal $500.

With the Wii outselling PS3 6-to-1 [engadget.com] in Japan, there's little reason to think third-party software makers will turn this around.

Re:Waiting for Metal Gear

[TheSciBoy]

Hear, hear. But even Nintendo fell into this trap with Twilight Princess. They used shaking as another button which triggers attacks, since the Wii game is more or less a direct port from the Game Cube.

To date, only a few game actually use the controller in a proper game (I'm not counting Wario Wares and Mario Party 8 type games): Wii Sports, Tiger Woods golf and maybe one or two more that I've forgotten.

Also disappointing to me is the fact that there aren't any RPG's for it yet. No, I'm not talking about WoW or somesuch, I want Final Fintasy or an RPG along those lines. Wii control optional. :)

Yes, I do remember the Neo*Geo.

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember that the console was created to sell to hotels and not individual consumers, and that it was released to the consumer market purely out of demand.

I remember that the console's arcade symbiosis made it impossible to compare to standalone consoles.

I remember that the console thrived for over 15 years.

Yet, everyone who as a kid couldn't afford one likes to characterize it as a failure.

Neo*Geo was successful. Neo*Geo CD was a small success. The Neo*Geo portable certainly was a failure. The original console was not. SNK didn't lose money on that.

Please stop perpetuating what has become an urban myth. If you want to bash an expensive console for failing, have your way with 3DO and Jaguar. Neo*Geo is not a good comparison in any way to PS3.

Re:Blu-Ray

[donaldm]

The PS3 can do so much more then play Blu-ray movies although I do have to admit a Blu-ray movie played to a HDTV looks great. Even DVD movies are upscaled via the PS3 to a HDTV via HDMI and the result is impressive. My son has a PSP and he can put MP4 movies onto his 2GB Memory Stick, ripped from his DVD's and play them back via his PSP though the PS3 and the output is also upscaled with impressive results. We have not played with this much so although I think it is possible to put the MP4 directly to the PS3.

As many know you can put Linux on the PS3 and this means you have all the Linux emulators (NES, SNES, Mame ... etc) to play your old (cough!) rom games. In fact what you can do with linux you can do on the PS3 although you don't have full access to all the hardware yet.

The PS3 can act as a media server although you may be better off using your PC as the server and the PS3 as the display device. You can even upgrade the PS3's 2.5" disk disk with a standard 2.5" disk without voiding your warranty. If you like you can use SD, Memory Stick or Compact Flash cards to transport your data, which could be from a camera, music files or even MP4 files. I have not played with MP4's yet so I cannot advise.

I do have the Australian 60GB PS3 that has WiFi which works well with my wireless router (Netgear WTG624). Took me 5 minutes to setup and makes it easy to do on-line gaming or surfing the web (worth getting a wireless keyboard and mouse but you should get one that has a 3+ meter (approx 3 yard) range) if you are interested in that. You can even print your photographs to a printer (limited support at the moment) if you want.

What else? Well you can play games on it. What's this I hear there aren't many PS3 games yet, well there are thousands of PS2 and PS1 (if you can get them) and more PS2 games are coming out unlike other later release consoles and although I have an Australian PS3 I can play between 85% and over 90% of games and newer games do work. In fact I only have one game (Wizardry - sigh!) that does not work. What is really nice is the fact that most games (PS2 especially) are upscaled to 720p, 1080i or 1080p (configurable) via component or HDMI and the result makes a good game even better. As for PS1/2 memory cards you can create as many as you want as well as the ability to save your PS1/2 game saves to your flash cards if you want. You want rumble? you can use your existing wired or wireless PS2 dual shock controller (you do need a PS2 to USB adapter) with PS1/2 games if they support rumble.

I have only touched on the parts of the PS3 I have played with, for more information see the forums (caution some rabid fan-boys) and make up your own mind. If you think the Wii or the Xbox360 offers the best bang for your dollar over the PS3 then it's your money. IMHO the PS3 offers the best value for my money but it may not be the same for you.

The only downside of the PS3 I have found is my wife likes the ability to play HD and upscaled DVD movies and my son likes Oblivion (it is lucky he is also an avid PC gamer as well) so we have to time-share the HDTV. I have a Linux laptop that my wife can surf the web with so she does not need to use the PS3 to do this.

probably won't help...

[Churla]

I'm not waiting for a specific price point, I'm just not enamoured with the product. They have generated no "need to own that" within me for it. And therein lies the failure.

If there was just one really revolutionary , fun game for it then I might be swayed. The problem is for me to believe that I would want to play said game somewhere, maybe at a friends house, in order to seal the deal and get me to buy one. And to this point besides one gadget and gaming accumulator where I work I don't know a single person I socialize with who owns one of these things.

Where is this generations Katamari?

Re:Blu-Ray

[phpWebber]

I agree with you. I'm not a "hater", it's just when I look at the rack of games, nothing jumps out at me yet. I am fine with that and bought my system regardless.

I just don't want a parent to plop down that much money to have it collect dust. If your child can pick up three ps3 games that you approve of, then it is worth it. If one of those appeals to you, all the better.

As to the original topic, Blu-Ray movies do look really nice :)

Re:Maybe - do they last in the field?

[MikeBabcock]

I've had a 60GB PS3 since March and it hasn't done anything stupid yet. The fan speeds up sometimes, slows down others, but is otherwise rock-solid. I did manage to have it get upset with me during a Blu-Ray movie I rented from Blockbuster but then kicked myself after ejecting the disc and realizing it was covered in smudges I should have cleaned off in the first place.

Re:Blu-Ray

[FatherOfONe]

So you have a multi thousand dollar PC sitting there holding your ripped DVD's. I have a 24" LCD and I can tell a HUGE difference between 720P and 1080P. Now having said that, it appears that the PS3 isn't for you, nor is it for anyone who has a standard def tv at the moment. However, if you have a HDTV and a large library of PS2 games then this isn't a bad buy at all.

Now for your argument that Microsoft isn't trying to "jam" something down my throat with the 360... Well I don't want or need another freaking DVD player, so why did they include it? Wasn't CD good enough... It is for me :-) Some people don't have HDTV's so why are they trying to cram HD down EVERYONES throat? You see the argument can go both ways... Sony included Blu-Ray in the PS3 and basically killed any chance of HD-DVD becoming the standard, but the cost of it may cause Sony to come in 3rd place with regards to console sales. Then again, some development shops are starting to fill over a 9GB DVD and like the 50GB of extra space that the PS3 provides, so in the next 3 or four years when the Xbox 720 or Wii 2 or whatever needs to come out, people can still use and buy a PS3. It is a tactical decision and I honestly don't know if it is the correct one, but I am not about to fault a company for pushing new technology.

As far as your argument of a streaming server... How many content providers are up for you doing that? I don't see many jumping at putting their HD content on iTunes, and ripping a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD disk is illegal so I imagine your HD content selection pretty much sucks now. Also, not that you care but you can use your PS3 to get that media off of your server and display it to your TV and then also stream it to your PSP over the internet if you wanted. Just to clarify, you can at this time download movies to your PSP OR have them streamed to your PSP. That to me is much cooler than say an iPod because I don't have to carry some 80GB ipod around with all the movies I "may" watch. I can keep them on a PS3 with some huge HD on it and then stream those to a PSP when I want to watch them. Granted, much like the iPod I could download them to the PSP and watch them locally, but I am not locked in to syncing. Again, not that you care but you could also take remote control of your PS3, download some new movies and then stream them to your PSP also.

Ok, enough for video crap. You may or may not care about that. The game lineup for the PS3 is poor, but there are some great games out. Motorstorm and Resistance fall of Man are two very good titles. The downloadable games Calling all Cars and Super Star dust and very good for under $10. Home looks to be a great way to interact with users online and if done correctly it will be (in my opinion) the best online experience of any of the new consoles. Little Big Planet looks to be a great game that may be out this fall. Ninja Gaiden Sigma (also on 360 but not as well done), appears to be a very good game, and Oblivion (also on multiple platforms but well done on PS3 with very low loading times... nice to have a HD in every system). Obviously future games like MGS4 and FF will be system sellers but those are not out yet and probably won't be out this year. In short there are quite a few very good games and some are on other consoles (primarily the 360). What I have found out is that the games developed for the 360 first and then ported to the PS3 look bad (not Wii bad), but bad, however games developed for the PS3 first look fantastic and play very well. I will also add that playing PS2 and PS1 games works very well. Seeing that the PS2 is still selling like mad, and developers are not going away from it, that is another nice option for "kids" games.

So I just laid out some very good games and there are quite a few more. Sony had and has some major issues but they are addressing them somewhat quickly. Would I love a PS3 for $200? Yes! But at the expense of quality (less than 1% of PS3 consoles are defective as opposed to another m